E 458 
.3 

.055 
Copy 1 




ADDRESS 



WILLIAM M. DICKSON, 



GREENWOOD HALL, 



CINCINNATI, SEPTExMBER 2 3, 1863, 



That we may have Peace we must now make War. 



ADDRESS 



WILLIAM M. DICKSON 





K 



GREENWOOD HALL, CINCINNATI, 



SEPTEMBER 23, 1863. 



CINCINNATI: 

KOBERT CLARKE & CO., PUBLISHERS. 

1863. 



ADDRESS 



WILLIAM M. DICKSON. 



Fellow-Citizens : — Certain orators, now addressing the 
people of this State, are in the habit of commencing their ora- 
tions with a gloomy description of the present condition of 
our countiy — particularly as contrasted with its condition 
before the war. Another could be given, but I choose to 
take their description just as they have made it. It is true, 
that less than three years since we were in the enjoyment of 
peace and much prosperity. Under the gentle sway of our 
Republican Government, in many of the elements of Na- 
tional greatness, we were rapidly advancing to the front 
rank of nations. Taxation, for national purposes, was uu- 
felt and unknown ; and demands for the service of the citizen 
in war were equally unknown. 

This is changed. To-day we are in the midst of a terrible 
civil war. Hundreds of thousands of our fellow-citizens 
have left the comforts and safety of home for the hardships 
of the camp and the dangers of battle. We have such a war 
as used to happen when Greek met Greek, and as now only 
happens when Americans meet Americans. There is. con- 
sequently, a vast expenditure of blood and treasure. The 
light in many a happy home has gone out forever, and nu- 
merous taxes with strange names greet our ears. All this 
is ver}' true. But what then i Were these facts set ibrth in 
exaggerated statement for the purpose of stimulating the 



people to greater exertion in putting down the rebellion 
which has produced these evils, it might be pardonable. 
But such is not the purpose. The impression is sought to be 
made that, as these evils are co-existent with the present 
Administration, thej are a consequence of it ; and if we 
would have a return to that happy time when Buchanan and 
Davis, Toucey and Floyd, ruled at Washington, we must 
submit to a coalition of these same traitorous elements. It 
is important, therefore, that we should have a clear under- 
standing as to who commenced the war, and why they did 
it. Wiien we have this understanding we will be the better 
able to determine what is our present duty. Tlie thoughts 
which I shall to-day present you will find their natural ar- 
rangement in response to these inquiries. 

AYho, then, commenced this war? Who fired the first 
gun ? Who struck the first blow ? Who appealed from the 
decision of the ballot-box to the trial of battle ? 

These questions relate to facts of such recent occurrence, 
and of so much notoriety, that it would seem there can be 
no doubt about them. But some one has been heard to in- 
dignantly inquire, " Why did Lincoln fire upon Sumter ?." 
This ignorance may be exceptional ; yet there is no more 
common expression in the mouths of the enemies of the 
country, North as well as South, than the declaration that 
this is " Lincoln's war." This expression is of equivocal 
import, but it is so put as to convey the impression that this 
is Lincoln's, and not the country's war — that Mr. Lincoln 
made it, and not Jefi'. Davis. Yet nothing is further from 
the truth, or in more direct contradiction to recent and no- 
torious facts. 

Mr. Lincoln was elected Tresident on the 6th of Novem- 
ber, 18G0 ; but he did not become President until the -Ith of 
March following. During this intervening period of four 
months, less two days, Mr. Lincoln had no official power 
whatever. Buchanan, Floyd & Co. could have ruled the 



Government precisely as they had done before the Gth of 
November. Indeed, during this time, as prior to it, every 
department of the Government except the House of liepre- 
sentatives would have been in the hands of the South or its 
friends ; and, even after Mr. Lincoln haJ become President, 
two departments of the Government — the Senate and the 
Judiciary — would have remained in the hands of his politi- 
cal enemies, and would have so continued to remain, during 
his entire Administration. So, had there been no secession, 
Mr. Lincoln could not have changed any existing law, nor 
added any new law ; nay, could not have formed his Cabi- 
net without the consent of his political enemies. All this 
was perfectly apparent at the time of his election ; yet, be- 
fore he became President, the secession of several States had 
taken place, and repeated acts of hostility had been com- 
mitted against the United States. 

On the very day following the election, before the votes 
were counted and the result had been officially made known, 
when it. was only a matter of telegraphic announcement, the 
officers of the General Government at Charleston, South 
Carolina, resigned their offices under circumstances of great 
indignity toward the National Government. The movement 
for the secession of the State was inaugurated, and on the 
20tli of December, 1860, was formally consummated. Flo- 
rida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Georgia and Texas 
followed, before Mr. Lincoln became President. 

On the 28th of December, 1860, South Carolina soldiers 
took possession of the Custom-house and forts at Charleston, 
except Sumter. On the 9th of January, 1861, South Caro- 
lina batteries fired seventeen shots at the Star of the West, 
in Charleston Harbor, two passing through her, and she was 
compelled to retire. On the 10th of January, same year, 
the forts of North Carolina were seized by State troops. On 
the 11th of January, same year, the forts below New Or- 
leans were seized by State troops. On the 12th of January, 



same year, ai-tillcry was ordered to Yicksbnrg to stop pass- 
ing boats, and on the night of the 13th the A. O, Tjder, u 
steamboat belonging to Cincinnati, was fired upon at Yicks- 
burg, and but for an accident to the priming of the gun, the 
firing might have been very destructive to the unsuspecting 
women and children on the boat. On the 21st of January, 
same year, a batter}^ of sixteen thirty-two pounders was 
erected at Memphis. On the 9th of February, same year, 
the arsenal at Little Hock, with Bragg's Battery and nine 
thousand arms, was seized by the State authorities. 

It will be observed that all these acts of open hostility, be- 
side many others, took place before Mr. Lincoln became 
President, and as to which he could have had no responsi- 
l)ility. Each one of these acts was a declaration of war, and 
would have been so considered had they been committed by 
any foreign nation. But the Government of the United 
States, then administered by Mr. Buchanan, made no resist- 
ance, struck not back, but again and again turned the other 
cheek. 

This excited Southern contempt, and provoked further ag- 
gression. Their newspapers and tlieir speeches in Congress, 
in their conventions and legislatures, teemed with insult 
and threat toward the North and Northern men, charging 
tliem with a want of spirit, with cowardice, and threatening 
them with dissolution, violence and war. 

The Houston (Texas) Patriot said: "They (the North) 
iiave been forced to eat dirt and bow down to the dominant 
Southern race, and their shrieks of rage arc the only sounds 
heard from the North. Through the press, from the work- 
shop, from the starving masses; from merchants ruined, 
from every trade and condition comes the cry, let us again 
bow to the superior race South ; let us live. The cowardly 
eighteen millions North told us we should not leave the 
ITnion. We did it openly and boldly, and they humbly ac- 
knowledged our CTOvernnunit as a necessity. Thev shouted 



the praises of the stars and stripes, and dared the chivalry 
to touch the sacred emblem. We have torn it down. We 
have placed in its stead the Hag of the Confederate States. 
We have dared them to coerce us and resent the insult. We 
have invited their vaunted numbers to the field, but the only 
cry that comes from the craven dogs is — military necessity, 
give up the forts, withdraw the troops, let us eat dirt and 
live. It is sickening to think of ever having lived in the 
same Government with such a people.*" 

On the 7th of January, 1861, Senator Toombs, in the 
Senate of the United States, said : " And now you see the 
glittering bayonet, and you hear the tramp of armed men 
from your capital to the Rio Grande. It is a sight that 
gladdens the eyes and cheers the heart of other millions 
ready to second them."'' 

On the 2d day of March, 1861, two days before Mr. Lin- 
coln was sworn in as President, Mr. Wigfall, Senator from 
Texas, in the Senate of the United States, said : •' The Star 
of the West swaggered into Charleston Harbor, received a 
blow planted full in the face, and staggered out. Your Jlay 
has been insulted — redress it if you dare. You have sub- 
mitted to it for two months, and you will submit to it for- 
ever."' 

On the 16th of February, 1861, Jeff. Davis made a speech 
at Montgomery, Alabama, in which he said': "The time for 
compromise is past, and we are now determined to maintain 
our position, and make all who oppose us smell Southern 
powder and feel Southern steel." 

These are not exceptional passages, but are taken at ran- 
dom, and fairly represent the current tone of the Southern 
literature of that day. 

Thus, with threat and insult. States had seceded, furts had 
been seized, arsenals despoiled, ships fired upon and into, 
the flag dishonored, batteries established, anl the free navi- 
gation of the Mississippi River stopped, before Mr. Lincoln 
had become President. 



Becoming President on the ith of March, 1861, he did 
not undertake to redress the -wrongs which the country had 
suffered under his innnediate predecessor, but addressed a 
most persuasive appeal to the insurgents for peace and har- 
mony, promising tliem the amplest protection in all their 
constitutional rights. " In your hands, ray dissatisfied fel- 
low-countrymen," said he, "and not in mine, is the mo- 
mentous issue of civil war. The Government will not assail 
you ; you can have no conflict without yourselves being the 
aggressors." 

In this spirit, and in perfect good faith he continued to 
act. 

At no place did an immediate collision of arms seem pro- 
bable, unless at Charleston, Sumter alone, of the Federal 
forts at that place, remained in the possession of the Nation- 
al forces. The South Carolina authorities had demanded its 
surrerrder to tliem, and there had been some mysterious nego- 
tiation about it between them and Buchanan, in the last days 
of his administration ; the result of which was, that the fort 
was not surrendered, and the small garrison in it was per- 
mitted to get temporary supplies from Charleston. This ar- 
rangement existed when Mr. Lincoln came into power, and 
continued for more than a month thereafter. He did nothing 
to change the state of things as he found them. But the 
border States had not seceded, and, under the influence of 
the considerate ])olicy of the Govermneut, and returning rea- 
son, it did not seem likely that they would. Beside, under 
the same influences, the zeal for secession was everywhere 
beginning to wane. This was quickly perceived by those des- 
perate men who had precipitated the cotton States into re- 
volution. They determined to strike a blow that would have 
a like affect upon the border States, and particularly upon 
Virginia, whose secession was desired most of all. It was 
riglitfuUy felt that, without her aid, the rebellion would be a 
failure. Her Convention was in session at Richmond, and 



•that city was crowded with all the violent revdliitionists of 
the State, and many from the other States. They had swag- 
gered, threatened, and demanded the passage of a secession 
ordinance, but the Convention still hesitated. Delay, how- 
ever, was death to the rebellion — a blow must be struck, and 
Charleston was the place selected. 

Meanwhile, the restive authorities there had grown im- 
patient. They prohibited the further supply of provisions to 
'the garrison ; they thus broke the status existing at the time 
Mr. Lincoln came into power. On the 3d of April, ISOl, 
Wigfall, of Texas, made a speech to the people of Charles- 
ton, in which he said: "Whether Major Anderson should be 
•shelled out or starved out, is a question merely of expediency. 
Tlie honor of South Carolina was vindicated when the flag 
•of the United States was fired at, and it has remained vindi- 
■cated, because they never liave resented that shot." At that 
date the honor and interest of South Carolina seemed -to be 
indifferent as to whether Major Anderson was shelled out or 
■starved out. Not so, however, the interest of the Virginia 
Revolutionists. Their interest demanded that a blow should 
be struck. The fiery Pryer hastens to Charleston, and in a 
frantic speech, in perfect harmony, however, with the temper 
of his audience, on the 10th of April, proclaims : " Do not 
distrust Virginia ! As sure as to-morrow's sun will rise upon 
<us, just so sure will Virginia be a member of this Southern 
'Confederation. And I will tell you, gentleman, what will 
put her in the Southern Confederation in less than an hour 
by Shrewsbury clock — strike a blow ! The very moment 
that blow is struck, old Virginia will make common cause 
"with her sisters of the South. It is impossible she should do 
otherwise." 

Meanwhile, the Government dispatched an unarmed vessel 
with provisions for the starving garrison. This was done 
with notice to the South Carolina authorities of the character 
^nd purposes of the vessel, and in the spirit of maintaining 



10 

the status quo which they had broken, in their denial of 
supplies to the garrison. But the necessities of the Vir- 
ginia secessionists would not brook delay. The immediate- 
surrender of the fort was demanded. Major Anderson re- 
plied that he would be compelled to surrender in a few days 
for the want of provisions. Beauregard inquired how long. 
Anderson replied, by noon of the 15th inst. unless provisions 
or controlling instructions arrived before that time. Beaure- 
gard rejoined that his batteries would open in one hour ^mf¥ki. 
^BlMMi«#>; and on the 12th of April, 1801, the blow was 
struck — a blow that did, indeed, precipitate Virginia into 
revolution, but also aroused the just vengeance of the long- 
forbearing North. But before this was known or suspected,. 
and while the cannon were yet sounding over the waters at 
Charleston, the spirit of aggression had become wild and 
frantic at the South. Walker, the rebel Secretary of War, at 
Montgomery, declared to an excited audience, ''Xo man 
could tell where the war commenced this day would end, but 
he would prophesy that the flag which now flaunts the- 
breeze here, would float over the dome of the old Capitol at 
Washington before the first of May." A crusade upon Wash- 
ington became the watchword and rallying cry throughout 
the South. Then, and not till then, did Mr. Lincoln call to 
arms. 

I appeal to any candid man, whether in the light of these 
facts, he can truly say that this is Mr. Lincoln's war ? Did 
he not forbear until forbearance had ceased to be a virtue I 
Nay, did not the secessionists, under circumstances of great 
wantonness strike the first blow, appeal from the ballot-box 
to the bloody arbitrament of the sword ? 

This brings us to the second inquiry. Why did they com- 
mence the war? What grievances had they, which required 
so fearful a remedy ? The affirmative is with them. They 
must satisfy a " candid world " of the sufficiency of the causes 
which impelled them to the course they have taken. And 



11 

here, at the threshold of our inqniiy, we are met with a 
strai]ge clifRculty. They have never been able to agree npon 
a statement of their grievances ; no two of them acting inde- 
pendently, have given the same statement ; the same ])ersons, 
speaking under different circumstances and in different 
places have assigned different causes, and have in the one 
place denied that to have been the cause of their action, 
which they had assigned as the cause in another place. 
Thus Yancey in Cincinnati announced secession as the reme- 
dy for anti-slavery aggression, j^et in England denied that 
this was the cause of secession, but attributed it to trade reg- 
ulations. Some again have denied all grievances and boldly 
justified revolution on the ground that they desired to erect 
a new political fabric, whose corner stone should be slavery. 
Thus spoke J\Ir, Stephens, of Georgia. In vain do we grope 
amid the confusion of declamatory speeches and resolutions 
for real grievances. Tliere were none — only pretexts. Ilence 
the diversity and contrariety of statements. A pretext plaus- 
ible in one place would not be so in another. Anti- slavery 
aggression might be an effective weapon to fire the Southern 
heart, but protective tariffs was a far more tangible one in 
England. I shall not attempt to touch upon all their pre- 
texts, but only upon that one which the friends of Vallandig- 
ham have thought most serviceable for use in this State. It 
is not remarkable that they have selected the same pretext 
which the secessionists had used so effectively for "firing 
the Southern heart." With a reluctant candor, Mr. Pugh, 
in a recent speech, said: "I do not say Lincoln struck the 
first blow. I am not here to accuse the Republican party of 
more sins than they have rightfully to answer for. But they 
provoked it." The provocation set forth in the speech was 
the alleged sectional anti-slavery character of the liepublican 
party. 

Do not mistake me. I am not about to defend or vindicate 
tlie policy of the Hepublican party. I will say nothing 



12 

Avhich a man who voted for Douglas or for Bell might 
not sa_y with consistency on liis part. I onlv propose to 
show that the policy of the Republican party, on the slavery 
question, whether wise or unwise, did not justify the South 
in seceding. The distinctive feature of that party's policy 
on this question, was its opposition to the further extension 
of slavery. It is in this respect that it was distinguished 
from the other parties ; and the issue was joined with it, on 
this point, in the Presidential contest of 18G0. 

It will be observed that there was nothing novel in this 
policy — it was the same policy as that which had been pro- 
claimed by Webster and other leaders of the Whig party — 
miy, it was as old as the Kepublic itself. The fathers of the 
Constitution looked upon slavery as an evil and treated it as 
an evil. This will not be questioned by any one who is 
familiar with the writings of Washington, Jeflerson, Madi- 
son, Hamilton, Franklin and others. Indeed, by the candid 
men of the South this is conceded. Stephens, of Georgia, in 
a memorable speech, says: ""The prevailing ideas enter- 
tained by Jefferson and most of the leading statesmen at the 
time of the formation of the old Constitution were that the 
enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of 
nature, that it was wrong in principle, socially, moralh' and 
politically." The divinity of slavery is a doctrine of later 
growth. It was not, it could not have been born in the age 
of the Declaration of Independence. Looking upon slavery 
as an evil, the fathers prohibited the introduction of slaves 
from aljroad. A large majority of the Convention that 
formed the Constitution desired to put into it an immediate 
prohibition of the importation of slaves; but in a spirit of 
concession to the then selfish demands of South Carolina, the 
provision of the Constitution not permitting Congress to 
prohibit the slave trade before 1808, was adopted. lu 
1807 Congress passed a law, to take effect in 1808, pro- 
hibitinf; the slave trade and denouncins: it as a crime. Look- 



ing upon slavery as an evil, the fathers of the Constitution 
prohibited the further spread of it within the Union, In 
1787 the Congress of the Confederation ordained the ordi- 
nance prohibiting slavery in all the Northwest Territory. 
This ordinance, in this respect, was similar to that of 
1781, drawn by Jefferson. The first Congress under the 
present Constitution passed a law affirming the ordinance of 
1787, which law bears the signature of George Washington, 
then President of the United States, and who had been Pres- 
ident of the Constitutional Convention. 

The Northwest Territory was then all the territory belong- 
ing to the General Government, so that hj the ordinance 
slavery was prohibited in all the territories over which Con- 
gress had any authority. Mr. Pugh, in the speech already 
referred to, says that the policy of dividing the common ter- 
ritories between freedom and slavery was the original policy 
of the Government ; " that by the ordinance of 1787 slavery 
was excluded from the territories north of the Ohio, and by 
leaving out the slavery clause, slavery was tolerated south 
of it ; and so the States came into the Union — Ohio, Indiana, 
Illinois, Michigan and "Wisconsin, as non-slaveholding States, 
and Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama and Mississippi, as slave- 
holding States." This is purely fauciful. When the ordi- 
nance of 1787 was ordained, the General Government did 
not own one foot of the Southern Territory, and had no 
authority to ordain any ordinance for it, either with or witli- 
out the anti-slavery clause. Part of this Southern Territory,, 
as Kentuck}^ the General Government never did become the 
owner of, and the other part it became possessed of by grants 
from the States owning it, but only upon the express condi- 
tion that the clause in the ordinance of 1787 prohibiting, 
slavery should never be applied to it. 

Thus, in relation to the Southern Territory named by Mr; 
Pugh, the General Government never had the opportunity of 
exercising any policy with reference to slavery. 



14 

The idea of a division of the common territory Letweeu 
slavery and freedom was unknown to the framers of the 
Constitution. It, too, was an idea of hiter growth. Mr. 
Webster has thns stated the understanding at the time the 
Constitution was framed (speech in the Senate, 1S4S): 
"When it was adopted, the state of the country was this : 
slavery existed in the Southern States ; there was a very 
large extent of unoccupied territor}-, the whole Nortliwest 
territory, which it was understood was destined to be formed 
into States ; and it was then determined that no slaveiy 
should exist in this territory. I gather now, as a matter of in- 
ference, from the history of the times and the history of the de- 
bates, that the prevailing motives with the North for agreeing 
to this recognition of the existence of slaver}^ in the Southern 
States, and giving a representation to those States founded 
in part upon their slaves, rested upon the supposition that 
no acquisition of territory would be made to form new States 
on the southern frontier of this country, either by cession or 
conquest. No one looked to any acquisition of new territory 
on the southern or southwestern portion. The exclusion of 
slavery from the Northwestern Territory, and the prospective 
abolition of the foreign slave trade, were generallj^ the former 
unanimously, agreed to ; and on the basis of these consider- 
ations, the South insisted that where slavery existed it should 
not be interfered with, and that it should have a certain 
ratio of representation in Congress." 

It is true, as Mr. Stephens said, in the speech already 
quoted from, the framers of the Constitution believed that 
slavery would be " evanescent and pass away." Its increase 
from abroad and its spread within being both prohibited, and 
the sentiment of the age being hostile to it, the country rested 
satisfied in the belief that it was "in the course of ultimate 
extinction." No interference with slavery in the States 
where it existed was attempted. It vras deemed best to 



15 

leave the management of the evil to those involved in it, 
and who understood it best. 

This three-fold policy of the fathers upon this question the 
Republican party sought to again introduce into the govern- 
ment of the country. While it opposed the revival of the 
slave trade and the extension of slavery, it at the same time 
in its platform, and again through the action of Congress, 
and Mr. Lincoln, in his inaugural address, denied all power 
in the General Government to interfere with slavery in the 
States where it existed, and all inclination to exercise any 
such power. 

I do not ask you to pass judgment upon the question 
whether it was wise or unwise for this party to seek to again 
introduce into the Government, upon this vexed question, 
tlie original policy of the country ; but I do ask you whether 
such an act, even if successful, was a sufficient cause for 
breaking up the Government and deluging the land with 
blood i 

No, fellow-citizens, whatever may have been the claims of 
expediency on this question, it was the South, and not the 
North, who made a departure from the original policy of the 
Government. The innovation was with them, not with us. 
It was they who had a new revelation, not we. Listen again 
to Stephens, the philosopher of the South: "Those ideas 
(reterring to the ideas on slavery of the framers of the Con- 
stitution, as above given), however, were fundamentally 
wrong. * * * Our new Government (the Southern Confed- 
eracy) is founded upon exactly opposite ideas. Its foundations 
are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the 
negro is not equal to the white man, and slavery, subordina- 
tion to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition. 
This, our new Government, is the first in the history of the 
world based upon this great physical, philosophical and moral 
truth. This stone, slavery, which was rejected by the first 



IS . 

builders, is become tlie chief" stone of the comer in our new 
edifice." 

We are now prepared to consider the charge of sectional- 
ism made by Mr. Tugh against the Re})nblican party. If it 
were sectional because of its adherence to the ancient policy 
of the Government, is it not obvious that this was caused by 
the departure of other sections from that policy, and dues not 
the faulr. wiiatever it may be, rest with them? 

It would si'em so. It is I'urther urged, that M'hatever may 
haye been the original policy, there was something of ine- 
quality and injustice in prohibiting the citizens of certain 
States immigrating with their property into the common terri- 
tories, purchased with the common treasure and blood. The 
answer to this is obvious. There was no prohibition to their 
taking whatever was considered by tlie ct)mmon understand- 
ing of men as property ; the prohibition of taking slaves was 
onl}^, in effect,- a prohibition to the citizens of certain States 
carrying into the territories certain of their local laws, and 
was a matter of which they could with no more propriety 
complain than could the citizens of any particular State 
because they could not carry with them the lo';al banking 
laws of their State. Beside, the charge of inequality may 
be returned : the introduction of slave labor necessarily, to a 
great extent, excludes free labor; it loses something of its 
respectability when associated with slave labor, and of course 
avoids it. 

Reminding you again that I am not attempting to vindi- 
cate the wisdom of tho Republican policy, only to show that 
it was not of such a heinous character as to justify the revo- 
lution of the Southern States, 1 conclude what I have to say 
on this branch of the sid)ject with a quotation from the speech 
of Mr. Webster, already rel'erred to, made in 1848, years 
before the formation of the Republican part}'. Having 
declaroil his opposition to the extension of slavery, lie con- 
cludcil with these words : 



17 

" I rest upon these propositions : First. Tiiat Mben this 
Constitution was adopted, nobody looked for any new acqui- 
sition of territory to be formed into slaveholding States. 
Secondly. That the principles of the Constitution prohibited, 
and were intended to prohibit, and should be construed to 
prohibit, all interference of the General Government with 
slavery as it existed, and as it still exists, in the States. And 
then, looking to the operation of the new acquisitions, which 
have in this great degree had the effect of strengthening that 
interest in the South by the addition of these five States, 1 
feel that there is nothing unjust, nothing of which any honest 
man can complain, if he is intelligent, and I feel that there 
is nothing with which the civilized world, if they take notice 
of so humble a person as myself, will reproach me, when I 
say, as I said the other day, that I have made up my mind, 
for one, that under no circumstances will I consent to the 
further extension of the area of slavery in the United States, 
or to the further increase of slave representation in the House 
of Representatives." 

The burden of complaint, however, in Mr. Pugh's 
speeches, relates to the action of the Republican party on 
this slavery question, during the last session of Congress un- 
der the Buchanan administration. He complains that during 
this time that party maintained a sullen silence ; that it 
would make no propositions of compromise, and would ac- 
cept none ; that fair and honorable propositions for settle- 
ment were made, which would have been adopted, and would 
have preserved the peace of the country, but for the action 
of the Republican party. 

To these grave charges, I reply, in the first place, that the 
Republican party, through the President elect, through 
members of the Senate and members of the House, through 
its papers and its speakers, through every channel of com- 
munication to the public, formally and informally, assured 
the country and the South, that it would &trictly obey the 
2 



18 

Constitution, and maintain in their full force all the rights of 
the States, and particularly all the guarantees against inter- 
fering with slaver}^ in the States ; nay, further, it proposed 
an amendment to the Constitution, expressly depriving tlie 
General Government of all power to interfere with slavery in 
tlie States ; it sought, also, to make States of all the territo- 
ries, and thus to settle the question of slavery in the territo- 
ries by removing the subject matter of controversy. Having 
gone thus far for peace, and meeting no response, it stopped 
and was silent. It saw States secede, forts seized, arsenals 
despoiled, the flag dishonored ; it heard the insults and 
threats of traitors ; it witnessed the imbecility of the Gov- 
ernment ; it knew its own inability at that time to vindicate 
the honor of the country, and it was silent and abided its 
time. It was not seduced, nor terrified, nor driven from its 
propriety. Amid a whii'lwind of passion, it was calm ; amid 
universal treachery, it was faithl'ul ; amid general despair, it 
was hopeful. Witli unsullied honor it took the helm of 
Government. 

I reply, in the second place, that the secessionists never 
made any propositions for a compromise, and tlie proposi- 
tions made with their tacit assent, or in their behalf, were 
neither " fair " nor "honorable." Mr. Fugh specially be- 
wails the rejection of the Crittenden Compromise. He deems 
it to have been both fair and honorable. He believes that it 
would have secured peace, and that it was defeated by the 
Republican party. He would attract favor to it, by repre- 
senting it as a mere revival of the Missouri Compromise. 
He would awaken gratitude to the Democratic party for its 
generous sacrifice of cherished sentiments, in advocating the 
revival oi' that which it had opposed. He would excite odium 
against the llepublican })arty for, on the contrary, rejecting, 
when tendered it, that which it had previously advocated. 

This is a tissue of misrepresentation. The Democratic 
party never favored or opposed the Missouri Compromise on 



19 

■principle, but alcptecl or rejected it, as the one er the o^her 
•course would conciliate Southern fa^or. The Republican 
party never advocated the Missouri Compromise ; but when 
it had been ad-opted against the wishes of the great body of 
the North, and the South had received its part of the con- 
sideration, the Republican party denounced, as a breach of 
plighted faith, the attempt to rob the North of its part of 
the consideration. 

Whether in the crisis of our affairs, as a compromise, the 
Republican party would have accepted it, tendered by the 
■South, I am not able to say. It is possible they would. But 
the Crittenden Compromise was not the Missouri Compro- 
mise. There is a world-wide difference between them. Mr. 
Pugh informs us that while the former was presented to 
^Congress by Mr, Crittenden, it was not peculiarly his work, 
but the joint work of a number of persons. This is quite 
.probable. There is internal evidence of a different paternity. 
The distinctive feature of the Crittenden Compromise, M'as 
the recognition of slavery south of the Missouri Compromise 
•line, and the injunction to protect it as property. " In all 
the territory now held, or hereafter to be acquired, south of 
said line of latitude, slavery of the African race is Iiereby 
recognized as existing, and shall not be interfered with by 
■Congress, but shall be protected as property by all depart- 
ments of the territorial government, during its continuance." 

This was, in idea and almost in language, Jefferson Da- 
vis' compromise for 1850. It will be remembered that in 
that year there was a crisis on this question of Slavery. It 
also related to the disposition of the territories. There was 
a fierce struggle and threats of disunion. At that time Da- 
vis was a Senator, and proposed, with great deliberation, his 
ultimatum, upon the rejection of which, he then proposed 
secession. It was as follows ; " I here assert that never will 
-I take less than the Missouri Compromise line, extended to 
the Pacific Ocean, with the specific recognition of the right 



2(3 

fo hold slares in the temtor}" below that line ; and that be - 
fore such territories are admitted into the Union as StateSy 
slaves may be taken there from any of the United States at 
the option of the owners." Fortnnatelj for the peace of the 
country then, Clay, Ca&s, and other great and patriotic lead- 
ers of the Whig and Democratic parties, s-till lived. They 
saw the here&y of this Davis- dogma; tl^ey exposed it, they 
denounced it, they struck it, they destroyed it, and sewt Da- 
vis home disgraced, to be still farther disgraced by the re- 
jection of his own peo-ple — wh^re, a'as fe-r the country! the 
lielping-hand of the imbecile Pierce found him, and again^ 
restored him to power. As soon as Mr. Davis had announced 
his position, Mr. Clay arose and made that memorable speech- 
which should be engraved in perennial letter-s upon his tomb- 
stone: '' I am extremely sorry to hear the Senator from Mis- 
sissippi say that he requires, first, the extensimi of the Mis- 
souri Compromise line to the Pacific, and also that he is not 
satisfied with that, but require^, if I understand him cor- 
rectly, a positive provision for the admission of slavery south 
of that line. And now, sir, coming from a slave State, as I 
do, I owe it to myself, I owe it to truth, I owe it to the sub- 
ject, to &ay that no earthly power could induce me to vot^ 
for a specific measure for the introduction of slavery where 
it had not before existed, either south or north of that line. 
Coming, as I do, from a slave State, it is my solemn, delib- 
erate and well-matured determination that no power — no 
earthly power — s-hall compel me to vote for the positive in- 
troduction of slavery, either south or north of that line. Sir, 
while you reproach, and justly too, our British ancestry for 
the introduction of this institution upon the continent of 
America, I am, for one, unwilling that the posterity' of the 
present iTihabitants of California and of New Mexico shall 
reproach us for doing just what we reproach Great Britain 
for doing to us," 

The paternity of the Crittenden Compromise is thus ob- 



21 

ri^ious. I do not know that Davis wrote it, but whoever did, 
tnerely embodied in it his old rejected dogma of 1S50, The 
Crittenden Compromise slioukl be then christened tlie Jeli'. 
Davis Compromise. Let him not be robbed of his rightful 
Jionors. Mr. Pugh denounces the KepubUcan party for re- 
fusiiig its support to this dogma, whicli the whole country 
rejected in 1850. He thinks that perfectly fair and honor- 
able wisich Mr. Clay denounced in such burning words. He 
thinks the Crittenden Compromise and the Missouri Com- 
promise the same thing, when Mr. Clay, the author of the 
■latter, said no eartlily power could induce him to vote for the 
•former. "Who is right. Clay or PugJi? 

Tiie Missouri Compromise applied alone to the Louisiana 
Purchase; the Crittenden Compromise to all our present and 
all future acquired territories. The former prohibited slavery 
north of latitude S6° 30', and was silent as to territory south 
of that line, leaving that, accoi-ding to Eepublican doctrine, 
free by operation of the Constitution, and free or slave, as 
the people thereof should determine, according to Douglas' 
doctrine. The Crittenden Compromise prohibited slavery 
-north of the same lino, but recognized it and enjoined its 
protection as property south of that line. It nationalized 
slavery ; it m^ade the Constitution declare .human beings 
property ; it put the offensive word ''• slavery " into the Con- 
stitution ; it made every citizen responsible for slavery ; it 
made that territory slave which was free when we acquired 
it from Mexico, audit offered a premium for '• tilUbustering,"' 
ibr the indefinite acquisition of territory South, whifo it 
.assigned to freedom territory that, under no circumstances^ 
,could become slave. 

The Kepublieans were not pi-epared for this retrograd/9 
movement ; they were not prepared to abdicate their princi- 
■ples and sustain, upon the insolent threat of traitors, prin- 
;3iples which they abhorred. Nay, had they thus degraded 
.themselves, it is b^' no means certain that their degradation 



90' 



wonld have prevented tlie war. T'lie best evidence tliat the- 
Crittenden Compromise would have been satisfactory was- 
wanting — tlie vote of the secessionists for it. Tlieir informal 
Avords were not binding ; beside, tliey had gone too far. 

When the first vote was taken vipon it, January IG, 1861,. 
South Carolina. Alabama and Mississippi had already se- 
ceded. Forts at Charleston, Xew Orleans and Wilmington, 
had been, seized ; and, in the language of Toombs, '' the 
tramp of armed men vras heard from the Ctipital to the Rio 
Grande.*' Had the Republiaans on that day tendered and 
sustained that compromise, and had their liumiliation thus 
become complete, with what propriety Jeff. Davis could have 
said (who still remained in the Senate, though his State had 
seceded):, " It is now too late ; my State has seceded." Then, 
indeed, could Yancey, in England, have pointed the linger 
of scorn at us, and have truthfully said, "It wa& not for fear 
of slavery that the South seceded. See, did not the Repub- 
licans offer, if we would stay with them, the entire abandon- 
ment of their principles, to the extent of even extending and 
protecting slavery in the territories themselves."' 

Tlie Republicans would not drink of that cup. " No earthly 
power could induce them to vote for a measure for the intro- 
duction of slavery -where it had not before existed." They 
savr that the South, with the aid of \hc Northern Democracy, 
could adopt the Ci'ittenden Compromise (in tliC form of a. 
Congressional enactment), if they desired to do so, and they 
left to them the glory or the shame of its passage or rejection. 

There was a time when humiliation- might have had its 
j,'eward. Had Mr. Pugh made na insurrection at Charleston, 
had he sufibcated that eloquent speech, and " laid his hand 
upon his mouth, and his mouth in. the dust," adopted the 
Southern dogma, dropped Douglas and nominated Hunter, 
the war might have been postponed and the South had four 
more years of preparation. Ah, Mr. Pngh, sliake not your 
gory locks at the Republicans '.. 



23 

Fellow-citizens, the fearful responsibility of commencing 
this war rests wholly with the rebels. There is no allevi- 
ating circumstance to lessen the weight of their guilt ; no 
cause, no provocation, no excuse. They sought the subver- 
sion of the Constitution, the reversal of the Declaration of 
Independence, and the erection of a new political fabric, 
whose corner-stone should be slavery. Failing in this, within 
the Union, they have been and are still endeavoring to erect 
their anomalous structure without the Union, and upon its 
ruins. 

By a natural order of procedure we are brought to the 
consideration of our third inquiry, what shall we do noiu ? 

Fellow-citizens, in my opinion, we have but two alterna- 
tives : we must subdue the rebellion or we must submit to 
it ; there is no opportunity for compromise. 

The President, in his Springfield letter, in compendious 
phrase, has presented the whole case. Addressing those 
dissatisfied with him, he thus speaks: "You desire peace, 
and you blame me that we do not have it; but how can we 
attain it ? There are but three conceivable ways : First. To 
suppress rebellion by force of arms. This I am trying to do. 
Are you for it? If you are, so far we are agreed. If you 
are not for it, a second way is to give up the Union. I am 
against this. Are you for it? If you are, you should say 
so plainly. If you are not iov force ^ nor yet for dissolution, 
there only remains some imaginary compromise. I do not 
believe any compromise, embracing the maintenance of the 
Union, is. now possible. All I learn leads to a directly oppo- 
site belief. The strength of the rebellion is in its military — 
its army. That army dominates all the country and all the 
people within its range. Any ofler of terms made by any 
man or men within that range, in opposition to that army, is 
simply nothing for the present, because such man or men 
have no power whatever to enforce their side of a compro- 
mise, if one were made with them. * * '^ A compro- 



24 

mise, to be effective, must be made either with those who 
control the rebel army, or with the people, first liberated 
from the domination of that army by the success of our army, 
Now, allow me to assure you that no word or indication from 
the rebel army, or from any of the men controlling it, in 
relation to any peace compromise, has ever come to my 
knowledge or belief. All charges and intimations to the 
contrary are deceptive and groundless, and I promise you 
that if any such proposition shall hereafter come it shall not 
be rejected and kept a secret from you." 

There is no escaping this argument. A compromise can 
not be made without the assent of both parties. We labor 
in vain for that end unless our action is reciprocated by the 
rebels. We did not commence the war. From the begin- 
ning our Government has proposed for terms of settlement, 
common obedience to the Constitution and laws. These 
terms still remain. Compliance with them on the part of 
the rebels, and the war ceases. This is perfectly well known 
to them. There is nothing harsh in these terms. We ask 
them to submit to nothing to which we ourselves do not 
submit. 

Shall we go further than this, and tender them concessions? 
This is objectionable on principle. If this rebellion obtains 
something by its violation of law which it could not obtain by 
obedience to law, it offers a premium and becomes a precedent 
for some future rebellion. But, waiving this, what conces- 
sions shall we propose ? Who can tell what will be satisfac- 
tory ? Shall we strike out blindly ? The rebels know. They 
are the complaining party, and ought to be able to state their 
grievances and the redress they desire. Common sense teaches 
that they ai'e the party to make propositions. They under- 
stand this.. Have they made any ? Where ? When ? To 
whom ? They have not proposed obedience to the old Con- 
stitution and the old laws, but the making of a new Consti- 
tution and new laws on new principles. When have they 



25 

abandoned tlieir purpose i We have seen that Davis, before 
he assumed his bad eminence, declared that " the time for 
compromise was past." Xever, by word or deed, has he 
departed from that dechiratiou. Stephens, once opposed to 
rebellion, but now an officer of it, has recently, after his 
effort to visit Washington, after the recent rebel defeats, pro- 
claimed undying hostility to reunion. So has Toombs ; so 
have all the leaders. No officer of the rebel array, no officer 
of any rebel State Government, no officer of the rebel Gen- 
eral Government, has anywhere, at any time, spoken a word 
for compromise and reunion, but the contrary, always. Great 
has been the temptation to make some sucli speech. They 
fully understand that the Peace Democracy of the Xorth are 
now contesting with the Union party of the Xorth — the war 
party — for the control of the Government. They know that 
the capital stock of this peace party is the declaration that 
there is a disposition on the part of the South to compromise, 
if we would but meet it. They are fully aware that an inti- 
mation from them, or any of them, indorsing this declara- 
tion, would greatly advance the peace party, and, to an equal 
extent, demoralize the war party. How delightful a thing 
to Vallandigham or Wood would be an informal note from 
Stephens or Toombs to the effect that if the Peace Democ- 
racy obtained the control of the Government they would, in 
a spirit of generous conciliation, aid them in the administra- 
tion of a restored Union. But no such note has ever come. 
See how these drowning men are catching at straws. Fer- 
nando Wood, in December, 1862, hastens to communicate to 
the President that somebody— whom he does not name, and 
for whom he does not vouch as having authority, but only as 
being '' likely to be well informed" — advises him " that the 
Southern States would send representatives to the next Con- 
gress, provided that a full and general amnesty should per- 
mit them to do so." 
It will be observed that these words are vague and indeti- 



2G 

nite. But tbeTresident, assuming that the proposition meant 
general submission to the National authoritj^, responded : 
" I say that in such case the war would cease on the part of 
the United States, and that, if within a reasonable time, 'a 
full and general amnesty ' were necessary to such end, it 
would not be withheld." This was tlie end of the thing. 
The " likely to be well informed party " never presented his 
credentials. So Vallandighani says that ho met no one in 
the South " who did not declare his readiness, when the war 
shall have ceased and invading armies been withdrawn, to 
consider and discuss the question of reunion.'' How vague, 
how indefinite ! The wolf proposes to the sheep to remove 
the dogs, and then the wolves and the sheep would -'con- 
sider and discuss" their diflerences. Mr. VaUandigham is 
fond of classical quotation, but he departs from the wisdom 
of the great Athenian, and actually proposes to play the part 
of the sheep, and would, of course, meet their fate. Again, 
Mr. Siephons sought to come to Washington in a "rebel 
vessel flying Confederate colors," with all the pomp and cir- 
cumstance of a foreign embassador, but refused to- indicate 
the purpose of his mission. Our Government rejected him. 
He returned to Richmond and announced that his intended 
visit related to the exchange of prisoners. Yet Mr. Pugh 
asserts that Mr. Stephens, contrary to his own statement, 
desired to present some peace propositions, and complains 
that the Government did not permit him to come, Mr. Fugh 
is aware of the hazard of the proceeding — that if we receive 
formal embassadors from the rebels, wo can not complain if 
foreign Governments do the same thing. If Mr. Stephens 
had such a mission in view, why could he not have intimated 
to our Government his purpose? He had no such mission, 
what stra-\vs are these ! How deceptive ! 

The leaders of the rebellion have crossed the Rubicon. 
Their personal fortunes are involved in their nefarious adven- 
ture. Success, death or exile awaits them. This they under- 



27 

stand ; for this they have bargained. Not so, however, the 
Southern people ; and we have abundant evidence that large 
numbers of them desire to return to the Union. But the 
rebel tyranny, sustained by rebel armies, sustained in turn 
by remorseless conscriptions, silences their tongues and para- 
lyzes their arms. Onr armies can alone relieve them, and 
until then they can have no voice in any settlement. 

Fellow-citizens — However momentous the issue may be, 
wo can not escape it ; we must subdue the rebellion, or we 
must submit to it. Shall we submit ? Shall we permit the 
dismemberment of the lieiniblic ? What shall m'c keep? 
What give up ? Where shall the boundary line be ? Shall 
we give up Florida, with the keys of the Gulf? Shall we 
yield Virginia, with the tomb of Washington, with the 
Hights of Arlington looking down upon our Capital, and 
loyal West Virginia penetrating almost to the lakes? Shall 
Ohio be a border State ? Shall Kentucky and East Tennes- 
see, with their brave and loyal people, be given over forever 
to the tender mercies of the rebels ? Who shall have Mis- 
souri, the Mississippi River, Texas, and the Territories ? 
Who can run a satisfactory boundary line? What indemnity 
for the past ? What security for the future ? What forts, 
standing armies, police regulations on the common border ? 
Shall the North be a slave hunting ground, in consideration 
of the free navigation of the Mississippi River ? Who wise 
enough to settle all these questions and keep them settled ? 
Alas, the history of the world teaches us that the peace 
which secures the dismemberment of the Union, will be the 
charter for endless war. Look at the commonwealth of 
Europe and her border wars. But assuming, an impossible 
assumption, that all these questions can be satisfactorily 
settled, can we permit a precedent of successful secession ? 
Can a Republican form of government be maintained in a 
country where there has been a successful appeal to the 
sword from the ballot-box ? Submission to the lawfully- 



28 

expressed will of the majority, is the necessity of Ilepul)lican 
institutions. They can not otherwise be maintained. If a 
people be not intelligent and virtuous enough to understand 
and observe this maxim, they aj"e unfit fur free government. 
The moment the lawfully-expressed will of the majority is 
overthrown by violence, the will of the people is not the 
law, but the sword. It may be in the hands of anarchy or 
of tyranny ; it matters not, free government is gone. 

Hence the significance, in the estimation of Europe, in 
years gone by, of our quiet submission to the elections, 
however stormy the canvass may have been. Hence, also, 
upon the failure of the South to submit to the lawful election 
of Mr. Lincoln, the declarations in Europe that the Republic 
was gone. They were right at least in theory, if the rebellion 
should prove successful ; and, in that event, perhaps they were 
right in fact. If the South is permitted to secede, why not any 
remaining State ? With what consistency could we attempt 
to retain a State by force, that should hereafter choose to 
secede? Does anyone think there will be no such eifort ? 
Mr. Vallandigham, in his place in the House of Represen- 
tatives, has gravely warned the country, that, in case of the 
success of the rebellion, the Northwest will not remain with 
the East. The jealousies of the sections could be appealed 
to by designing politicians ; unkind and hostile feelings 
would be excited ; crimination and recrimination would fol- 
low ; at length blows. States would be divided against 
themselves. Part of the people of Ohio, for example, by 
natural and acquired affinities, would look Southward ; part, 
by the same infiuences, would look Northward. "When the 
contest came to blows, an internecine war, without a parallel 
in this war, except in Western Missouri, would consume our 
State. Such a result is not fanciful, but the natural sequence 
of the success of the present rebellion, Mexico would be 
our prototype — her beginning and her end would be ours. 



29 

No, fellow-citizens, if we would have lasting peace, security 
and free institutions, wc must now make war. 

Resolved, united, devoted, we can not fail. Numbers, 
wealth, skill and a just cause are with us. Our fortune has 
been heretofore somewhat checkered, but, uj^on the whole, we 
have made steady and great progress. Day by day the re- 
bellion is dying. Nothing can save it, except defection with 
us. Let us, then, &tand together and move together, shoulder 
to shoulder, arm to arm and foot to foot— a solid phalanx. 
The dread realities of disunion leave us no choice, and the 
strengthening hope of a restored and regenerated Union, 
beckons us onward. The glory of founding the Republic 
belongs to our fathers, but the equal glory of saving it 
may be ours-. May we prove equal to our high calling. 

Such is the faith of the Union party of Ohio. It has 
declared in its recent Convention, that the war must go on 
until the authority of the National Government is every- 
where established. This is the whole of its creed— its alpha 
and omega. All other issues are subordinated. It asks no 
one to abandon his party principles ; it only asks that the 
voice of party be now still, that the nation. m.ay live. It 
asks no indorsement of tlie Administration, or of any of the 
peculiarities of its policy ; it only asks that forbearance may 
be exercised toward it, and that every aid and assistance be 
given it in its efforts to suppress the rebellion.. When the 
nation is saved, these other questions can be settled. Ad- 
ministrations are for but a day, but a country lost may never 

be regained. . 

The Democratic party of Ohio, in its platform, is silent. 
It speaks neither for war nor peace, for the suppression ot 
the rebellion nor for submission, to- it. Upon the question 
of greatest momeat that presses upoa our attention at every 
turn, that can not he escaj^ed, its platform has no deliverance. 
Last vear it had the Crittenden War Resolution. This lias 



30 

been omitted. But the omission has been more than sup- 
plied in the candidate. Mr. Vallandigdam's position on 
this question was of record. 

In liis deliberate speech in Congress, of January 1-1, 18G3, 
he asks, '■'■ But ought this war to continue ? I answer, no — 
not a day, not an hour. * * "What then ? Stop fighting, 
make an armistice — no formal treaty. "Withdraw your 
armies from the seceded States. * * Recall your fleets, 
break up your blockade." Further on, in the same speech, 
he, in another form, repeats the same idea. Referring to 
foreign mediation, he says, '"Mediation, as proposed by the 
Emperor of France, I would accept at once." Napoleon's 
proposition was for an armistice of six months, during 
which time all military operations, by land and by sea, 
should cease. 

Again, in his letter accepting the nomination, after his 
sojourn South, he refers to the same idea, and reaffirms it. 
In the passage already quoted for another purpose, he says 
he saw no one in the South, who " did not declare his readi- 
ness, when the war shall have ceased and invading armies 
been withdrawn, to consider and discuss the question of re- 
union." And he adds : " I return, therefore, with my opinions 
and convictions as to war or peace, and my faith as to final 
results from sound policy and wise statesmanship, not only 
unchanged, but confirmed and strengthened." 

He thus, in this letter of acceptance, supplies the hiatus 
in his party's platform. Their silence, with their full knowl- 
edge of his position, gave him a right to do this; and their 
continued support of him is a complete indorsement and 
adoption of his views. Such he will claim, and rightfully 
claim, should he unfortunately be elected Governor. Thus 
the Democratic party is lully committed, in Ohio, to the 
policy of an immediate withdrawal of our armies from the 
seceded States, and the withdrawal of our fleets, upon no 
other condition than a mere armistice. 



31 



1 now asK any candid man, in view of ^f^f^^ 
C.nn\'\ Dav s ask more t J^vei}ri)iii„ >\c i 

foreign intviguos would be tbrown wide open. ^ ng n a, 

if not Kentucky, the Mississippi River, New Oilcans, an. 
,U lie .-iven up-and no equivalent, except an avinisti e 

ma^could -ive greater aid and comfort to t .0 vebe s ( 

A^ is"™ he^veryniaKing of sueb a proposition giving 

tt n aid and conifoi-t ? Mr. Maury, tbe i"teUig-.t eiiiissary 

cbcdliou iu Europe, understands it; indeed, he liinks 

t,!is aid sufficient to balance all our recent victories. Listen 

'" ':! V-Ulandigham waits and watches over tlie border, 
pledged, if elected Governor of the State of Ohio, to array 
it ao-ainst Lincoln and the war/' ^ ,• v.i 

Fdlow-citizens, tbe issue is made. He who votes or Vab 
lancV, lim, votes for submission and disunion-whatever h 
: Uitend. He who votes for Brougb, votes tor the L men 
and the preservation of Republican institntions. Cl.oo»e 
you, this day, whom ye will serve." 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiin 

012 028 989 5 




